An act of war?

What do you think about the world?
User avatar
Metanis
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 1417
Joined: July 5, 2002, 4:54 pm
Location: Wisconsin

An act of war?

Post by Metanis »

Iran playing with fire?
Iran is paying Taliban fighters $1,000 for each U.S. soldier they kill in Afghanistan, according to a report in a British newspaper.
The Left reports there will be war soon if MSNBC forgets to include their standard anti-USA boilerplate in such news reporting.
Fairweather Pure
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 8509
Joined: July 3, 2002, 1:06 pm
XBL Gamertag: SillyEskimo

Re: An act of war?

Post by Fairweather Pure »

Man, that's pretty cheap. Our soldiers get paid a lot more than that!
User avatar
Zaelath
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 4621
Joined: April 11, 2003, 5:53 am
Location: Canberra

Re: An act of war?

Post by Zaelath »

"I have to sign off on all the receipts and I have to add up how much each fighter deserves after each operation. I also have to communicate in the Iranian language," the treasurer told the newspaper.
The Iranian language? Like Farsi? which is used in Afghanistan for business?

The whole thing seems unlikely, but that's the clumsiest phrase in the whole article, even allowing for translation.
May 2003 - "Mission Accomplished"
June 2005 - "The mission isn't easy, and it will not be accomplished overnight"
-- G W Bush, freelance writer for The Daily Show.
User avatar
miir
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 11501
Joined: July 3, 2002, 3:06 pm
XBL Gamertag: miir1
Location: Toronto
Contact:

Re: An act of war?

Post by miir »

Yea, you guys should go to war with Iran now... your stunning victories in Iraq and Afghanistan should have them quaking in their boots.
I've got 99 problems and I'm not dealing with any of them - Lay-Z
User avatar
Winnow
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 27525
Joined: July 5, 2002, 1:56 pm
Location: A Special Place in Hell

Re: An act of war?

Post by Winnow »

miir wrote:Yea, you guys should go to war with Iran now... your stunning victories in Iraq and Afghanistan should have them quaking in their boots.
We may not be able to completely squash rebels up in the hills but the United States knows how to steamroll standing armies. Iran has an army so yes, they should be scared except for the few that find some hills to run to.

It would be preferable support a rebellion, having the smart Iranians overthrow the religious Iranians although there sure are a lot of psycho religious people in that country.
User avatar
miir
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 11501
Joined: July 3, 2002, 3:06 pm
XBL Gamertag: miir1
Location: Toronto
Contact:

Re: An act of war?

Post by miir »

Winnow wrote:It would be preferable support a rebellion, having the smart Iranians overthrow the religious Iranians although there sure are a lot of psycho religious people in that country.
Oh so kinda like the exact opposite of what you accomplished in Iraq?
I've got 99 problems and I'm not dealing with any of them - Lay-Z
User avatar
Kilmoll the Sexy
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 5295
Joined: July 3, 2002, 3:31 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: bunkeru2k
Location: Ohio

Re: An act of war?

Post by Kilmoll the Sexy »

If we are going to war with Iran, I hope they get smart and just absolutely level the entire country in one long bombing raid. Screw this dealing with insurgents crap.
User avatar
masteen
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 8197
Joined: July 3, 2002, 12:40 pm
Gender: Mangina
Location: Florida
Contact:

Re: An act of war?

Post by masteen »

Yeah, bombing the shit out of the cities where all the middle class moderates live isn't that great of an idea. We need to go back to the days of SEAL team 6 assassinations and shit. Put a .50 caliber hole where the head of the latest Ayatollah used to be, maybe shit gets a little less crazy there.
"There is at least as much need to curb the cruel greed and arrogance of part of the world of capital, to curb the cruel greed and violence of part of the world of labor, as to check a cruel and unhealthy militarism in international relationships." -Theodore Roosevelt
User avatar
Noysyrump
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 1201
Joined: January 19, 2004, 2:42 am
Location: San Diego, CA

Re: An act of war?

Post by Noysyrump »

miir wrote:

Yea, you guys should go to war with Iran now... your stunning victories in Iraq and Afghanistan should have them quaking in their boots.
Winnow wrote:It would be preferable support a rebellion, having the smart Iranians overthrow the religious Iranians although there sure are a lot of psycho religious people in that country.
Oh so kinda like the exact opposite of what you accomplished in Iraq?
First off, the second the other guys troops are standing in your yard eating out of your fridge, you lose.

Second, you should be happy USAdians are a nice enough people to allow them to blow us up with IEDs at all. How do you think things would have played out were we more like some other "Occupyers". Had the first IED blown up some Einsatzgruppen towns would have been leveled. By alowing the conquered peoples to be free, you do make it easier for that bad element to cause mischief. The war ended after 2 weeks in Iraq. It's the media's and politik's misuse of the word "war" that apparently confuses folks like you.

Mission was accomplished in Iraq no doubt. There is a more US friendly government in power. Oil is still beeing sold for the all mighty dollar, and not euros as Sadam threatened. And a very clear message has been sent to the wackjob Jihadis. Blow shit up in the US, and you will put another Islamic nation into occupied status. Sooner or later they'll learn terrorism will no longer serve their purpose. We are not the French.
Sick Balls!
User avatar
miir
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 11501
Joined: July 3, 2002, 3:06 pm
XBL Gamertag: miir1
Location: Toronto
Contact:

Re: An act of war?

Post by miir »

And a very clear message has been sent to the wackjob Jihadis. Blow shit up in the US, and you will put another Islamic nation into occupied status. Sooner or later they'll learn terrorism will no longer serve their purpose.
But you see the problem is that Iraq really wasn't an 'Islamic nation'... it was secular.
It was by far the most moderate of Middle Eastern nations.

Ooops, I guess you might want to re-think that theory.


If anything the invasion and occupation of Iraq probably created more american hating terrorists.
I've got 99 problems and I'm not dealing with any of them - Lay-Z
User avatar
miir
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 11501
Joined: July 3, 2002, 3:06 pm
XBL Gamertag: miir1
Location: Toronto
Contact:

Re: An act of war?

Post by miir »

masteen wrote:Yeah, bombing the shit out of the cities where all the middle class moderates live isn't that great of an idea. We need to go back to the days of SEAL team 6 assassinations and shit. Put a .50 caliber hole where the head of the latest Ayatollah used to be, maybe shit gets a little less crazy there.
Heh, that would probably work. :D
I've got 99 problems and I'm not dealing with any of them - Lay-Z
User avatar
Noysyrump
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 1201
Joined: January 19, 2004, 2:42 am
Location: San Diego, CA

Re: An act of war?

Post by Noysyrump »

miir wrote:
And a very clear message has been sent to the wackjob Jihadis. Blow shit up in the US, and you will put another Islamic nation into occupied status. Sooner or later they'll learn terrorism will no longer serve their purpose.
But you see the problem is that Iraq really wasn't an 'Islamic nation'... it was secular.
It was by far the most moderate of Middle Eastern nations.

Ooops, I guess you might want to re-think that theory.


If anything the invasion and occupation of Iraq probably created more american hating terrorists.
Afganistan was Invaded due to it's islamic/al-queda lean. Iraq was invaded over it's threat to accept euros in lue of dollars, and as a plus, was predominatly Islamic.

No doubt it will anger more folks, however in the long run it is the best aproach. More trouble short term with a better outcome overall. Ze Duetchevolk's approach in the 40s was easier short term, disasterouse long term.

Modern terrorism began in Algiers. The Khoran tells the people to not allow the infidel to occupy thier lands. Algeria and Morocco had no other way to get the french out, so they began a strategy of harrasment. It worked. The french moved out of north africa allowing self rule. Al-Queda's goal was to get us out of Isreal. Instead it got us into Afganistan and Iraq. Mission failed. Another 9/11 style attack will most deffinatly put us into Iran*, and possibly Pakistan**.


* Iran also wants to accept euros for oil, violating the treaty.
** Pakistan's government is on friendly terms, so intervention thier would not be an invasion, but a political bullying and deployment of US troops to "help police the border with afganistan".
Sick Balls!
User avatar
Aslanna
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 12372
Joined: July 3, 2002, 12:57 pm

Re: An act of war?

Post by Aslanna »

Noysyrump wrote: Iraq was invaded over it's threat to accept euros in lue of dollars, and as a plus, was predominatly Islamic.
Whaaaat? You're insane. It was the WMDs. Everyone knows that.
Have You Hugged An Iksar Today?

--
User avatar
Leonaerd
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 3023
Joined: January 10, 2005, 10:38 am
Location: Michigan

Re: An act of war?

Post by Leonaerd »

Aslanna wrote:
Noysyrump wrote: Iraq was invaded over it's threat to accept euros in lue of dollars, and as a plus, was predominatly Islamic.
Whaaaat? You're insane. It was the WMDs. Everyone knows that.

:/
User avatar
Aabidano
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 4861
Joined: July 19, 2002, 2:23 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Florida

Re: An act of war?

Post by Aabidano »

Winnow wrote:It would be preferable support a rebellion, having the smart Iranians overthrow the religious Iranians although there sure are a lot of psycho religious people in that country.
That looked quite likely until the "axis of evil" asshattery started, it essentially enabled the election of the loonies currently in power.

As it is Bush set them back 10 years but I think they'll get there despite him.

Invading Iran is not at all comparable to invading Iraq. While we could "win", in the long run we'd lose. As long as the Arab states have the US by the cojones, controlling the basis of our economy as they do, invading Iran is idiocy.

The Israelis are going to take them out in a year or two anyway. A nuclear Iran is the end of Israel and Israel knows it.
"Life is what happens while you're making plans for later."
Neroon
Gets Around
Gets Around
Posts: 213
Joined: July 16, 2002, 3:35 pm

Re: An act of war?

Post by Neroon »

Aabidano wrote: That looked quite likely until the "axis of evil" asshattery started, it essentially enabled the election of the loonies currently in power.
I remember laughing when he said that the first time (was it his first State of the Union address?). I honestly thought he said Iran by mistake. He was always saying the wrong thing by mistake in speeches.
User avatar
Aabidano
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 4861
Joined: July 19, 2002, 2:23 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Florida

Re: An act of war?

Post by Aabidano »

Offhand that speech and his shooting of the messengers about the upcoming financial meltdown (as did Clinton) were probably the two dumbest things of his presidency.

I'm still amazed at the lack of reporting on the deal between the Bush admin and US oil companies for post invasion oil deals. The Iraqi government shut that idea down by threatening to expose it, not support us, etc...
"Life is what happens while you're making plans for later."
User avatar
Metanis
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 1417
Joined: July 5, 2002, 4:54 pm
Location: Wisconsin

Re: An act of war?

Post by Metanis »

I think it's imperative that we shut down all oil wells in or near the American coast just like the progressives want. That will teach them stingy Iranians. Then we can buy more oil from Iran's neighbors and maintain our huge military presence in the region. It is such a good cover story for our real goal of providing military assistance and protection to Israel. I can read the press release from the American Navy even now! It will be all about how they scrambled jets to protect the vital oil supply sea lanes and shot down the entire Iranian air force by accident one sunny afternoon. Gee, who knew the Israelis would use the opportunity to take out Iran's nuke facilities in a daring surgical strike. (Damn those silly Tea Partiers for trying to ruin the whole affair by arguing for American energy self-sufficiency! If we didn't have vital interests in the Gulf to protect then all them troops could come home and the scheme wouldn't work.)
User avatar
Aabidano
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 4861
Joined: July 19, 2002, 2:23 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Florida

Re: An act of war?

Post by Aabidano »

American energy self sufficiency is one of the roots of this whole problem I'll agree.

Unfortunately the only thing I see form the tea party in this respect shows it's roots in corporatism by wanting to aggressively keep doing more of the same. It's almost like someone told them the highway ends in two miles and they respond "We'll drive faster then!" or "Build a bigger car!" as a solution. Or maybe even "Fire all the road workers and hire them back as independent contractors!". Their solutions are nothing more than extending the problem and making it harder to turn once we hit the end of the road. They do however have great potential to make lots of money for the people paying for the tea party's existence.

I haven't seen serious cries to end inshore drilling except from the far (and ignored) left. On the same note more inshore drilling while part of a solution really isn't one over time. Coming up with a plan to drastically reduce oil use while not trashing our economy is what needs to happen.

We need "something new" to continue to maintain our position in the world, that's how we got to where we are, or were 15 years ago anyway. That means investment in R&D, which historically has come from the Govt, and is anathema to a tea bagger. Private industry in the US as it stands now has no interest in making $100 5 years from now if it will cost them $10 today. (The company I work for was bought out by a French firm ~4 years ago, refreshingly different business outlook.)
"Life is what happens while you're making plans for later."
User avatar
Kilmoll the Sexy
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 5295
Joined: July 3, 2002, 3:31 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: bunkeru2k
Location: Ohio

Re: An act of war?

Post by Kilmoll the Sexy »

Solar is going to be a much more popular way to go in the very near future. I actually intend to start working towards powering some of my house with solar within the next year and possibly have the entire thing solar within 5. They are coming up with some innovations that gives you the ability to add panels to your house by merely plugging them into an existing outlet.....which will allow many people to take advantage of them.
User avatar
Metanis
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 1417
Joined: July 5, 2002, 4:54 pm
Location: Wisconsin

Re: An act of war?

Post by Metanis »

Aabidano wrote:Blah, blah, blah, blah, ... government control... more government control... hand wringing... more hand wringing...
I studied alternative energy in high school nearly 40 years ago. I actually have worked on numerous solar and geothermal installations while I was employed by Honeywell as a electronic controls technician. Even more importantly, I had to perform cost and payback analysis. The math was abysmal then and is only slightly better now.

"Peak oil" has got to be the longest running incipient crisis in history. (The first Peak Oil scare mongering happened in like 1910!)

Gee, don't you think it would be really, REALLY good to have some mechanism in place to deal with this crisis? ???

OMG!!!! We have the "marketplace"! Free markets are, you know, sorta a machine designed to allocate resources wisely when there are many competing demands! Wow, who would have thunk it?

So use government research if you want. And impose a reasonable energy tax to cover the costs of cleanups, spills, and remediation. And then excoriate carbon every chance you get. But then let the free market work it's magic to accomplish the orderly and viable transition to alternative energy sources. Your vote shouldn't count any more than the 7 billion other humans who desire energy resources.
User avatar
Aabidano
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 4861
Joined: July 19, 2002, 2:23 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Florida

Re: An act of war?

Post by Aabidano »

Metanis wrote:OMG!!!! We have the "marketplace"! Free markets are, you know, sorta a machine designed to allocate resources wisely when there are many competing demands! Wow, who would have thunk it?
Theoretically I agree, I still think it's the best option.

Believing the free market will work the way you seem to think it will, and demonstrably hasn't is the worst kind naivety at this point. It's certainly gotten us to the point we're at now.

Free markets, absolutely, but leave enough of a regulatory framework in place to protect the populace and by extension the businesses themselves.

Or do you think the global financial meltdown was a good thing? You can bet most of those at the top except for a few scapegoats didn't feel the sting to the extent that most did, and are still doing pretty well, at the expense of those they screwed.

For the Tea Party\Fox News version of the free market to work you have to assume labor economics isn't broken, and that corporate leadership wants what's best for the company and employees in the long haul, and that boards of directors are decent human beings. Again, experience show us differently. Not everywhere, but in enough places over a long enough period of time that companies have to be douchebags to remain competitive.
"Peak oil" has got to be the longest running incipient crisis in history. (The first Peak Oil scare mongering happened in like 1910!)
You may well be correct, I've no idea what the reality of it is. In the end it really doesn't matter, it's all been taken over by politics and corporate interests. And oil will run out at some point. Who will have the money to pay for what's left? The US or China?
"Life is what happens while you're making plans for later."
User avatar
Aabidano
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 4861
Joined: July 19, 2002, 2:23 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Florida

Re: An act of war?

Post by Aabidano »

"The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of the Conservatives is to prevent the mistakes from being corrected." - G. K. Chesterton
"Life is what happens while you're making plans for later."
User avatar
Metanis
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 1417
Joined: July 5, 2002, 4:54 pm
Location: Wisconsin

Re: An act of war?

Post by Metanis »

If you think we experience anything even remotely akin to a free market then I'd like you to click on this link.

http://bookstore.gpo.gov/baskets/cfr-listing.jsp

and look at what it would take to order just one full copy of United States "Code of Federal Regulations". To order just the Index will set you back $68 and is 1126 pages long. I repeat that is just the index. The code is in 50 major sections and each section is broken down into multiple parts.

I'll hazard a guess and say the complete "Code" runs to TENS of THOUSANDS of pages!

Now keep in mind that this "Code" is only part of the story, they have a disclaimer page:
The U.S. Code does not include regulations issued by executive branch agencies, decisions of the Federal courts, treaties, or laws enacted by State or local governments.
I notice they have a great deal on a yearly subscription to the "Code" update. Only $1664.00 a year will keep you up on the law of the land!

I think:

1) Nobody can possibly keep up with these restrictions.
2) Only the little guy gets burned by these laws.
3) The connected people almost always weasel out.
4) We are past the point of diminishing returns with all these rules/regulations/laws.
5) Even God dictated just 10 main laws and 640 Jewish-only requirements.

I'm not saying you need to scrap everything and start over, but the knee-jerk Progressive & Conservative reaction to restrict human activity has got to stop. For a long time I've felt the worst phrase in the English language is the expression, "There ought to be a law...". No there ought to be an education and some perspective!

One area that requires perspective is the false conception that suddenly one day we will turn on the spigot and discover the crude oil has quit flowing. It's a fallacy. There will ALWAYS be crude oil in the ground. It will just get more and more expensive to extract. That means prices will rise over time. That means that alternatives will become economically feasible. As they become more feasible we will automatically quit using so much oil! All this will happen naturally if we let markets work themselves out. In order to mess it up will take government action. Like Fannie and Freddie. Like Timmy Geithner and Larry Summers and Ben Bernanke playing their God games. They piss in the wind and call it an epiphany.
User avatar
Nick
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 5711
Joined: July 4, 2002, 3:45 pm

Re: An act of war?

Post by Nick »

We may not be able to completely squash rebels up in the hills but the United States knows how to steamroll standing armies. Iran has an army so yes, they should be scared except for the few that find some hills to run to.
Yeah, they're quaking in their boots huh?
User avatar
Winnow
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 27525
Joined: July 5, 2002, 1:56 pm
Location: A Special Place in Hell

Re: An act of war?

Post by Winnow »

Nick wrote:
We may not be able to completely squash rebels up in the hills but the United States knows how to steamroll standing armies. Iran has an army so yes, they should be scared except for the few that find some hills to run to.
Yeah, they're quaking in their boots huh?
Iraq didn't seem very scared either before we rolled them. What's your point?
User avatar
Bubba Grizz
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 6121
Joined: July 3, 2002, 12:52 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Green Bay, Wisconsin

Re: An act of war?

Post by Bubba Grizz »

So in the grand scheme of things, where do you think we are in relation to the prophecies of Nostrodamas? You know the one I'm talking about. The one with the guy in the blue turban who blows up NYC and then the great eagle and the great bear (US and Russia?) go kick his ass in a 20 year war? Would the time in Iraq and Afganistan be counted in that 20 years or has it yet to happen?
User avatar
Noysyrump
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 1201
Joined: January 19, 2004, 2:42 am
Location: San Diego, CA

Re: An act of war?

Post by Noysyrump »

Well the great bear already put in it's 8 years. So only 5 years remain for us.

Course yer on crack.
Sick Balls!
User avatar
Noysyrump
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 1201
Joined: January 19, 2004, 2:42 am
Location: San Diego, CA

Re: An act of war?

Post by Noysyrump »

Best way to beat Islam... CONVERSION!

Image
Sick Balls!
User avatar
masteen
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 8197
Joined: July 3, 2002, 12:40 pm
Gender: Mangina
Location: Florida
Contact:

Re: An act of war?

Post by masteen »

Unregulated free markets only work when all parties have perfect information. The goal of regulation is to provide a level playing field. The goal of the teabaggers is to serve their corporate overlords by hollerin' loud enough to convince other stupid people that a level playing field is a plot by pinko socialists to steal their guns.
"There is at least as much need to curb the cruel greed and arrogance of part of the world of capital, to curb the cruel greed and violence of part of the world of labor, as to check a cruel and unhealthy militarism in international relationships." -Theodore Roosevelt
*~*stragi*~*
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 3871
Joined: July 3, 2002, 1:59 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: kimj0ngil
Location: Ahwatukee, Arizona
Contact:

Re: An act of war?

Post by *~*stragi*~* »

Winnow wrote:
miir wrote:Yea, you guys should go to war with Iran now... your stunning victories in Iraq and Afghanistan should have them quaking in their boots.
We may not be able to completely squash rebels up in the hills but the United States knows how to steamroll standing armies. Iran has an army so yes, they should be scared except for the few that find some hills to run to.

It would be preferable support a rebellion, having the smart Iranians overthrow the religious Iranians although there sure are a lot of psycho religious people in that country.
ever notice how iran sounds a lot like the us only right now the smart americans run the country with the crazy metanis teabaggers wanting to overthrow us and turn us into iran? hoo boy.
User avatar
Keverian FireCry
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 2919
Joined: July 3, 2002, 6:41 pm
Gender: Mangina
Location: Seattle, WA

Re: An act of war?

Post by Keverian FireCry »

I really want to eat that sandwich...
User avatar
Aabidano
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 4861
Joined: July 19, 2002, 2:23 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Florida

Re: An act of war?

Post by Aabidano »

Metanis wrote:3) The connected people almost always weasel out.
I think the whole point that you missing is the people driving the tea party are the "connected people" and life members of the same sociopathic group that were allowed to create the mess. In part due to deregulation. The agenda they drive will only make things worse over time, it's like asking to go back to the labor environment the US had circa 1910.

Govt isn't a business and trying to run it as one, beyond being required to balance the books is idiocy.

The million rules that drive the US are there largely because we have career politicians who must have something to justify their continued existence as career politicians.
"Life is what happens while you're making plans for later."
User avatar
Metanis
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 1417
Joined: July 5, 2002, 4:54 pm
Location: Wisconsin

Re: An act of war?

Post by Metanis »

Aabidano wrote:I think the whole point that you missing is the people driving the tea party are the "connected people"
Some group of people wants you to believe that statement. If you were to actually do some research you would quickly learn the fallacy of it. I can't think of any better proof than the results of yesterday's primary elections. Both the Left and the GOP establishment would have you believe otherwise but the Tea Party is a real movement of disaffected citizens who are aiming to change the discourse in American politics.

Therefore, your basic analysis is faulty since it depends on faulty premises.

I know, you like so many others on the Left will simply squeeze your eyes even more tightly shut and raise your voice to drown out the competing narrative. You might want to start thinking of the Tea Party like a jack hammer. They're going to get your attention one way or another.
User avatar
masteen
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 8197
Joined: July 3, 2002, 12:40 pm
Gender: Mangina
Location: Florida
Contact:

Re: An act of war?

Post by masteen »

It took me all of 10 seconds to find all sorts of shady ties within the teabagger movement. Do you know who Dick Armey and David Koch are? They are the rich assholes using stupid poor people to do their bidding under the guise of DERP MOAR FREEEDOMZ and DERP LESS TAXENS.
"There is at least as much need to curb the cruel greed and arrogance of part of the world of capital, to curb the cruel greed and violence of part of the world of labor, as to check a cruel and unhealthy militarism in international relationships." -Theodore Roosevelt
User avatar
Aabidano
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 4861
Joined: July 19, 2002, 2:23 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Florida

Re: An act of war?

Post by Aabidano »

Metanis wrote:Some group of people wants you to believe that statement. If you were to actually do some research you would quickly learn the fallacy of it.
All you have to do is look at the candidates themselves and their advocates to come to that conclusion. Though I will admit that Jim Hightower was the first one that gave me that suspicion.
Metanis wrote:..the Tea Party is a real movement of disaffected citizens who are aiming to change the discourse in American politics.
That makes a good sound bite on Fox anyway. While your "movement" possibly was was not a deliberate creation and may have had that aim, it certainly seems to be pointing to a far different agenda at this point.

Looking at the candidates background, their corporate and political supporters, the history of nearly every "conservative" reformer since the 60s all point to the fact that nothing is going to change in the fashion they've duped people like you into believing it will. Again, looking at the candidates and their supporters past actions I have every reason to believe they'll make things worse for most people.

*Edit - Of course I'd imagine you really believed that Obama meant what he said in the presidential campaign and were all ready to head for your bunker in Idaho afterwards.
"Life is what happens while you're making plans for later."
User avatar
Metanis
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 1417
Joined: July 5, 2002, 4:54 pm
Location: Wisconsin

Re: An act of war?

Post by Metanis »

Metanis wrote:I know, you like so many others on the Left will simply squeeze your eyes even more tightly shut and raise your voice to drown out the competing narrative. You might want to start thinking of the Tea Party like a jack hammer. They're going to get your attention one way or another.
Rebuts the last 2 posts quite nicely. By the way, I'll raise you a George Soros for David Koch, and Al Gore for Dick Armey.
User avatar
Kilmoll the Sexy
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 5295
Joined: July 3, 2002, 3:31 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: bunkeru2k
Location: Ohio

Re: An act of war?

Post by Kilmoll the Sexy »

Personally, I think the Tea Party is a great thing for the country. Whether I agree with their views or not, them getting a foot in the door and winning some seats will drive a wedge into this craptastic 2 party system and begin the process of eliminating this hard line one extreme or the other crap that our political system has become. If the Tea Party wants to be that extreme right wing party, then at some point the GOP will wake up and begin running the true moderates that used to reign within that party.

I don't know why everyone is all torn up about the Tea Party anyway. If you are looking purely at what party a candidate is from to make your decision, then you are part of the fail. If a Tea Partier aligns with my political views better than other candidates, then I would vote for them. I absolutely refuse to back someone just because of the D, R, or T behind their name.
User avatar
Aabidano
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 4861
Joined: July 19, 2002, 2:23 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Florida

Re: An act of war?

Post by Aabidano »

I really hadn't looked at it from that perspective. I was hoping for a moderate, perhaps libertarian third party arising but I suppose a far right one may serve the same purpose in the end.
...at some point the GOP will wake up and begin running the true moderates that used to reign within that party
I was hoping that would have happened after the drubbing they took in the last election. It actually looked like it last summer. But then how many years did it take the democrats to realize they couldn't win from the far left? 14?

If they manage to fully co-opt the GOP, we'll have a far more polarized situation.

The tea party as another party doesn't bother me in the least. Could well be a good thing as you pointed out. Their myopic view of the world does bother me.

As things stand now they're pulling votes from the far right, it would seem that primaries they win make it more likely that moderates are going to vote for democrat or NPA candidates.
"Life is what happens while you're making plans for later."
User avatar
Kilmoll the Sexy
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 5295
Joined: July 3, 2002, 3:31 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: bunkeru2k
Location: Ohio

Re: An act of war?

Post by Kilmoll the Sexy »

As things stand now they're pulling votes from the far right, it would seem that primaries they win make it more likely that moderates are going to vote for democrat or NPA candidates.

At first, I thought the same thing. Then I realized that if the people in those primaries actually defeated their GOP rivals, then there are good chances that area is ultra-conservative and/or just completely fed up with the status quo. Just as an example, look at O'Donnell.....I personally think she is a little out there with her personal views on a lot of things, but the people there who put Joe Biden in office may well be fed up enough to vote for someone like this. I seriously would not have thought it possible until Scott Brown won in Mass.


For the record, I would vote for her even though she is WAY the fuck out there in her personal views. I guess it would remain to be seen if she would follow her word or just be another Sotomayor type looking to get into office to further their personal agenda.
User avatar
miir
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 11501
Joined: July 3, 2002, 3:06 pm
XBL Gamertag: miir1
Location: Toronto
Contact:

Re: An act of war?

Post by miir »

The common consensus is that O'Donnel winning the Delaware primary handed that seat back to the Democrats.

Castle was a moderate republican who would have gotten all the moderate republican votes and a good portion of the moderate democrats. O'Donnell has little hope of grabbing any moderate (R or D) votes. She's got a lock on the far right, that's about it.
Also, the GOP dug up and flung so much dirt at her during the campaign... they basically saved the dems the hassle of doing it themselves.


That nutbar hasn't got a hope in hell of winning anything else.
I've got 99 problems and I'm not dealing with any of them - Lay-Z
User avatar
Noysyrump
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 1201
Joined: January 19, 2004, 2:42 am
Location: San Diego, CA

Re: An act of war?

Post by Noysyrump »

The Republican party will not learn shit from the Tea Party. Just like they didn't learn jack from Ross Perot.
Sick Balls!
User avatar
Kilmoll the Sexy
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 5295
Joined: July 3, 2002, 3:31 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: bunkeru2k
Location: Ohio

Re: An act of war?

Post by Kilmoll the Sexy »

They will learn or they will be gone and the country will be a socialist mess.

They did not learn from Ross Perot because Ross Perot was an idiot. It was the worst political move of all time for him to drop out of that race then jump back in. All they got from that was that the 2 parties were all there was going to be and they could do whatever they wanted.

The real hope would be to force the GOP and the libtards to both run more moderate candidates. I think the GOP learned enough to run a guy like Scott Brown who is a very moderate conservative...and learn that being GOP does not mean you HAVE to oppose every single things the Dems propose. The same thing goes for the Dems....they are going to get a crash course in what happens when they do whatever the hell they please when the public opposes it. Lessons should be learned on both sides from the last 6 years or so and hopefully we can all remember them for the next 30.
User avatar
Zaelath
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 4621
Joined: April 11, 2003, 5:53 am
Location: Canberra

Re: An act of war?

Post by Zaelath »

miir wrote:The common consensus is that O'Donnel winning the Delaware primary handed that seat back to the Democrats.

Castle was a moderate republican who would have gotten all the moderate republican votes and a good portion of the moderate democrats. O'Donnell has little hope of grabbing any moderate (R or D) votes. She's got a lock on the far right, that's about it.
Also, the GOP dug up and flung so much dirt at her during the campaign... they basically saved the dems the hassle of doing it themselves.


That nutbar hasn't got a hope in hell of winning anything else.
^ This.

One of our political commentators suggested that if the Tea Party wasn't started up by the Democrats it should have been; all it's going to do is split the vote on the right so the left ends up being entrenched in Government.
May 2003 - "Mission Accomplished"
June 2005 - "The mission isn't easy, and it will not be accomplished overnight"
-- G W Bush, freelance writer for The Daily Show.
User avatar
Kilmoll the Sexy
Super Poster!
Super Poster!
Posts: 5295
Joined: July 3, 2002, 3:31 pm
Gender: Male
XBL Gamertag: bunkeru2k
Location: Ohio

Re: An act of war?

Post by Kilmoll the Sexy »

We will see in November. I think you would be right if she was trying to unseat an incumbent that had been entrenched there for years, but that is not the case. Unless the Dems are running a moderate that is opposed to spending money (ahahahahahahahahahahahah) then she still has a real shot as people are intent on putting checks on the liberal spending.
User avatar
Aabidano
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 4861
Joined: July 19, 2002, 2:23 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Florida

Re: An act of war?

Post by Aabidano »

The little I've seen about her it's frightening that she was able to win anything against anyone.
"Life is what happens while you're making plans for later."
User avatar
Gzette
Almost 1337
Almost 1337
Posts: 845
Joined: July 5, 2002, 7:57 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Austin, Tx

Re: An act of war?

Post by Gzette »

The Tea Party scares me to say the least. First off, I think liberals should not be so dismissive of their candidates. Even folks on this board have said they do not agree with O'Donnell personal beliefs, which are quite whacky (Let's have Masturbation is Adultery for $500 Alex!), yet they support her. The media machine directly or indirectly supporting the movement is impressive. Faux News just openly embraces it and will espouse it as the New America (just as MSNBC jizzed its pants all over Obama). CNN and networks find it easy work to just gawk at it and ask "what does this mean?"

As a movement, I envy the Tea Party folks.

As for the substance, it is quite thin. I think it's based in racism. Tea Party-ers scream about Obama raising taxes. Well he hasn't. I'm a little hopeful, as it seems they've somewhat abandoned the "birther" misinfo that dominated part of the TPers message during its outset in early 2009. Yet the Muslimz OMG retardation is still in the works, and hotter than ever with media promulgation of the fucktard Pastor shitfuck and the Community Center "OMG 9-11 HATE Mosque". The most controversial spending (TARP) was proposed and widely supported by the same people who now give thanks to the TPers, and have aligned themselves with TPers. It reaks a little of anti-war Kerry in 2004, IMHO.

Bottom line, the Republican party has been this far right, or even further so, of late. What I find confusing is how the religious right and TPers are somewhat analogous. O'Donnell aligns herself with a movement founded on watchdog spending and supremely conservative fiscal policy. Yet her platform reads more like something out of Oral Roberts University. Can a religious right person just say "I'm a true conservative" and be considered a TPer. Being a "true conservative" seems to have taken on 2 meanings: values and fiscal policy. They seem divided, and I think conservatives disagree on what is more important, the deficit or abortion. I also think the water is being very muddied.
Gzette Shizette - EQ - 70 Ranger - Veeshan - retired
Bobbysue - WoW - 70 Hunter - Hyjal - <Hooac>
HOOAC 4 EVAH!

knock knock
who's there
OH I JUST ATE MY OWN BALLS
User avatar
Gzette
Almost 1337
Almost 1337
Posts: 845
Joined: July 5, 2002, 7:57 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Austin, Tx

Re: An act of war?

Post by Gzette »

Zaelath wrote:
miir wrote:The common consensus is that O'Donnel winning the Delaware primary handed that seat back to the Democrats.

Castle was a moderate republican who would have gotten all the moderate republican votes and a good portion of the moderate democrats. O'Donnell has little hope of grabbing any moderate (R or D) votes. She's got a lock on the far right, that's about it.
Also, the GOP dug up and flung so much dirt at her during the campaign... they basically saved the dems the hassle of doing it themselves.


That nutbar hasn't got a hope in hell of winning anything else.
^ This.

One of our political commentators suggested that if the Tea Party wasn't started up by the Democrats it should have been; all it's going to do is split the vote on the right so the left ends up being entrenched in Government.
It somewhat was. At the outset of the Obama admin., Rahm Emmanuel, David Plouffe and Axelrod were quick to name Rush Limbaugh as the new face of the republican party, albeit in a semi-facetious manner.

Edit: One final thought: moderate Republicans are going to be the big loser in this. I can see this big tent of idiocy essentially muscling moderates out. If true, I wonder if the Democratic party could be willing to take on the "big tent" role the Reps had in the 2000s. Can we accept a progressive who is pro-life? Can we accept a spending hawk who believes all religions deserve to be respected?
Gzette Shizette - EQ - 70 Ranger - Veeshan - retired
Bobbysue - WoW - 70 Hunter - Hyjal - <Hooac>
HOOAC 4 EVAH!

knock knock
who's there
OH I JUST ATE MY OWN BALLS
User avatar
Metanis
Way too much time!
Way too much time!
Posts: 1417
Joined: July 5, 2002, 4:54 pm
Location: Wisconsin

Re: An act of war?

Post by Metanis »

Gzette wrote:The Tea Party scares me to say the least. First off, I think liberals should not be so dismissive of their candidates. Even folks on this board have said they do not agree with O'Donnell personal beliefs, which are quite whacky (Let's have Masturbation is Adultery for $500 Alex!), yet they support her. The media machine directly or indirectly supporting the movement is impressive. Faux News just openly embraces it and will espouse it as the New America (just as MSNBC jizzed its pants all over Obama). CNN and networks find it easy work to just gawk at it and ask "what does this mean?"

As a movement, I envy the Tea Party folks.

As for the substance, it is quite thin. I think it's based in racism. Tea Party-ers scream about Obama raising taxes. Well he hasn't. I'm a little hopeful, as it seems they've somewhat abandoned the "birther" misinfo that dominated part of the TPers message during its outset in early 2009. Yet the Muslimz OMG retardation is still in the works, and hotter than ever with media promulgation of the fucktard Pastor shitfuck and the Community Center "OMG 9-11 HATE Mosque". The most controversial spending (TARP) was proposed and widely supported by the same people who now give thanks to the TPers, and have aligned themselves with TPers. It reaks a little of anti-war Kerry in 2004, IMHO.

Bottom line, the Republican party has been this far right, or even further so, of late. What I find confusing is how the religious right and TPers are somewhat analogous. O'Donnell aligns herself with a movement founded on watchdog spending and supremely conservative fiscal policy. Yet her platform reads more like something out of Oral Roberts University. Can a religious right person just say "I'm a true conservative" and be considered a TPer. Being a "true conservative" seems to have taken on 2 meanings: values and fiscal policy. They seem divided, and I think conservatives disagree on what is more important, the deficit or abortion. I also think the water is being very muddied.
Good post. The water is muddied simply because the news media is out of its depth. They're like blind people trying to understand the great paintings or deaf people understanding the great composers. Reporters and editors now just aren't equipped to understand anything but their safe progressive world views.

The Tea Party phenomenon can be explained easily. "Anything or anybody but liberal Democrats like Obama, Pelosi, and Reid." People are believing the evidence of their own eyes. They are seeing a political party that doesn't share their ideals or their fears. Even a good dog will turn bad if you keep kicking it often enough.

Tea Party people WANT to be ideological now and the Republican brand is all soft, white, and fatty like my belly. So the Tea Partiers are pushing the Republicans to shape up or ship out.

Tea Partiers are so strongly united against the Obamaniacs they have temporarily put aside their differences in order to "throw the bums out". The old social vs. fiscal schisms will return once the country isn't veering so hard to the left.
User avatar
Gzette
Almost 1337
Almost 1337
Posts: 845
Joined: July 5, 2002, 7:57 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Austin, Tx

Re: An act of war?

Post by Gzette »

Point taken. But I question the wisdom of nominating under-qualified people with questionable intelligence out of fear-based politics.
Gzette Shizette - EQ - 70 Ranger - Veeshan - retired
Bobbysue - WoW - 70 Hunter - Hyjal - <Hooac>
HOOAC 4 EVAH!

knock knock
who's there
OH I JUST ATE MY OWN BALLS
Post Reply